4 ms·

One very sinister outcome of measures to reduce road demand is that it unfairly impacts the lower and lower-middle classes. People who work in high-paying jobs

One very sinister outcome of measures to reduce road demand is that it unfairly impacts the lower and lower-middle classes. People who work in high-paying jobs wouldn't think twice about spending $10 on a road charge, but someone working minimum wage simply can't afford that on a daily commute. Carbon taxes are often subject to this criticism as well: if you tax everyone who uses a car, then the lower class simply can't afford to. Truckers and delivery workers still have to, though, because that's the job, and either the company, or, more likely, the consumers absorb the cost of any such taxes. On one hand, it would solve the problem as described, but on the other it would significantly impact the people who are the most sensitive to such impacts, economically speaking. There is also, in the US at least, a strong argument to be made about Freedom of Movement. I don't know if it has ever been tried in court, but I would be interested to see the result of such a court case.

cardiffspaceman 5y ago
> There is also, in the US at least, a strong argument to be made about Freedom of Movement. I don't know if it has ever been tried in court, but I would be interested to see the result of such a court case. I have often suspected that merely charging a toll for using a road creates records which could be subpoenaed. Now say you have a club that meets to discuss edgy topics concerning the government of the day. Do they want their travels to be recorded? Now, this seems pretty quaint because around here, they use license-plate scans to reinforce the automated collection of tolls, and who knows what else is going on. FWIW I'm on the same frequency with respect to the disproportionate impact that road pricing and road usage reduction measures have on people with low-paying jobs.
honkycat 5y ago
I have heard this argument before, but there is an easy work-around: low-income people can request an exemption and if they meet the requirements they will be exempt from the taxes. Though honestly, at the end of the day, there are large corporations making huge profits whose workers commute to their office every day, and they should be the ones footing the bill. I think of my local situation in Portland, Oregon, where many people in Vancouver Washington commute to portland every day and do not pay a DIME for the road infrastructure they clog up.
- Turing_Machine 5y ago
  > I have heard this argument before, but there is an easy work-around: low-income people can request an exemption That is only "easy" if you ignore the time spent by the low-income people to fill out government paperwork on a regular basis, and ignore the cost of the army of new bureaucrats that would be required to process it.
  - Kye 5y ago
    Or aren't aware of it in the first place. I think a lot of calls for means testing comes from people who can't extrapolate from their experience at the DMV to other under-funded, over-documented, over-gatekept government services. They don't realize the people they want to means test already have to deal with a lot more than the DMV for services with worse forms and wait times. Adding another is just cruel. I'm a big fan of just giving people money. From another of my comments: >> "UBI. Really. Just give people money. It generates more benefit than it costs. Look how well billionaires did when unemployment benefits were buffed up. Now imagine if they were taxed reasonably to capture some of that toward covering the cost. People still looked for work, but they could afford to hold out for better jobs." https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29292955 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29292955
- lotsofpulp 5y ago
  >there is an easy work-around: low-income people can request an exemption and if they meet the requirements they will be exempt from the taxes. There is an easier workaround. Just give people cash, and then hit it with marginal income tax. >I think of my local situation in Portland, Oregon, where many people in Vancouver Washington commute to portland every day and do not pay a DIME for the road infrastructure they clog up. From my understanding, OR collects income tax for any work performed in OR. This means residents of WA pay OR income taxes. Is this not considered "paying a DIME for the road infrastructure" (or otherwise costs of operating infrastructure in the state of Oregon?) A commuter from WA to OR seems to be all gravy to OR. OR residents clog up OR roads just as much as WA residents do, but WA residents pay just as much OR state income tax as OR residents, but surely derive a less proportionate benefit from OR state income taxes.

cardiffspaceman 5y ago

> There is also, in the US at least, a strong argument to be made about Freedom of Movement. I don't know if it has ever been tried in court, but I would be interested to see the result of such a court case. I have often suspected that merely charging a toll for using a road creates records which could be subpoenaed. Now say you have a club that meets to discuss edgy topics concerning the government of the day. Do they want their travels to be recorded? Now, this seems pretty quaint because around here, they use license-plate scans to reinforce the automated collection of tolls, and who knows what else is going on. FWIW I'm on the same frequency with respect to the disproportionate impact that road pricing and road usage reduction measures have on people with low-paying jobs.

honkycat 5y ago

I have heard this argument before, but there is an easy work-around: low-income people can request an exemption and if they meet the requirements they will be exempt from the taxes. Though honestly, at the end of the day, there are large corporations making huge profits whose workers commute to their office every day, and they should be the ones footing the bill. I think of my local situation in Portland, Oregon, where many people in Vancouver Washington commute to portland every day and do not pay a DIME for the road infrastructure they clog up.

Turing_Machine 5y ago
> I have heard this argument before, but there is an easy work-around: low-income people can request an exemption That is only "easy" if you ignore the time spent by the low-income people to fill out government paperwork on a regular basis, and ignore the cost of the army of new bureaucrats that would be required to process it.
- Kye 5y ago
  Or aren't aware of it in the first place. I think a lot of calls for means testing comes from people who can't extrapolate from their experience at the DMV to other under-funded, over-documented, over-gatekept government services. They don't realize the people they want to means test already have to deal with a lot more than the DMV for services with worse forms and wait times. Adding another is just cruel. I'm a big fan of just giving people money. From another of my comments: >> "UBI. Really. Just give people money. It generates more benefit than it costs. Look how well billionaires did when unemployment benefits were buffed up. Now imagine if they were taxed reasonably to capture some of that toward covering the cost. People still looked for work, but they could afford to hold out for better jobs." https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29292955 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29292955
lotsofpulp 5y ago
>there is an easy work-around: low-income people can request an exemption and if they meet the requirements they will be exempt from the taxes. There is an easier workaround. Just give people cash, and then hit it with marginal income tax. >I think of my local situation in Portland, Oregon, where many people in Vancouver Washington commute to portland every day and do not pay a DIME for the road infrastructure they clog up. From my understanding, OR collects income tax for any work performed in OR. This means residents of WA pay OR income taxes. Is this not considered "paying a DIME for the road infrastructure" (or otherwise costs of operating infrastructure in the state of Oregon?) A commuter from WA to OR seems to be all gravy to OR. OR residents clog up OR roads just as much as WA residents do, but WA residents pay just as much OR state income tax as OR residents, but surely derive a less proportionate benefit from OR state income taxes.